Talk:List of plants poisonous to equines

Other poisons

{{help}} please. I am uncertain at where this should go: Paterson’s Curse (Echium plantagineum) is a plant that is toxic to horses due to a compound contained in the plant known as ‘pyrolizidine alkaloid’. Ref: http://72.14.235.104/search?q=cache:lfVlYDODVasJ:www.tams.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/13250/patersonscursepdf.pdf+%22patersons+curse%22+and+horses&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=au Another source of trouble for horses are some fruits especially (I think) quinces.Cgoodwin (talk) 02:26, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Not an expert on the issue but Echium plantagineum seems to belong to class Magnoliopsida, so List of plants poisonous to equines#Class Magnoliopsida would probably be the correct section. If you are going to use that as a reference, though, the original PDF would be better than the Google cache. x42bn6 Talk Mess 02:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Cgoodwin (talk) 02:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Usefulness to horse owners

This page may fit the wikipedia format for a list of plants (useful for botanists), but the list is relatively useless for the typical horse owner. Compare with:

[1] [2] [3] (note that they offer the lists sorted by both common or botanical name)

[4] [5] [6]

This page would be MUCH more useful for horse owners if the list were presented in a table sorted alphabetically by common name, with multiple entries if the plant has multiple common names. It would also be much more useful if the list were color coded so that plants that are especially toxic (and should be removed immediately from horse pastures) are highlighted. It would also be much more useful if the list had a column indicating where the plant is commonly found so that a person in the UK could quickly skim the list to see which plants are commonly found in the UK etc.

Is there some wikipedia reason to prohibit reorganizing this list in the fashion I describe above? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.135.103.134 (talk) 16:26, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Check the page history of this article. I think once upon a time someone did go through and change all the common names to scientific names. It probably would start an edit war if they were all changed back. And I think there is a "sort of" policy on this (having vague recollection of some discussion on the topic) -- I think all the wikipedia plant articles are probably classified under scientific name, but My personal opinion is that I think it would be useful to add the common name IN ADDITION to the scientific classification. Your ideas are good ones. What I would do if I were you is look at other lists out there related to plants as well as the guidelines on creating list-type articles in the first place and just proceed from there. The best thing to do is to create a "sandbox" off of either your own talk page or this talk page and start to create the content the way you think it ought to be, ask people to comment, and generally once you have a community consensus that your sandbox is an improvement on the existing article, you can swap it in. Of course, keep in mind that this is a BIG job! But if you are up for it, I'd get yourself a screen name so we can help you more easily, and give it a shot! Montanabw^(talk) 06:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and be sure we have chokecherry, black walnut, and red maple on the "very toxic" list for the USA, as well as lupine, locoweed, and leafy spurge as mildly toxic in the western USA. Oh man, is this a job, but needed! Montanabw^(talk) 06:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I, too, really think that this list should be firstly in the order of common name plus the scientific name, along with links of course. It is very hard to search now! See List of poisonous plants.Cgoodwin (talk) 03:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

What you've been doing works well for me. Good work, by the way. I threw in a few USA problem plants, if you could be so kind as to "fix" those too...?? Montanabw^(talk) 18:32, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

How about a table with sortable columns? Or, make good use of categories, which is the best way to support browsing by common names, without prescribing which common name to sort on. Most of these plants have more than one common name. Redirects can be included in categories. --Una Smith (talk) 20:59, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Suggest in addition to this list creating a category 'plants toxic to horses' and then tagging all the relevent articles (might be more useful to create category of 'plants toxic to mammals' and then make this a subcategory) - I've never created a category so not sure how to go about it - or perhaps there is one already ? Ah ok I see it's already been created discussed and deleted in favour of this list. In which case the various articles in this list seem to be missing links back to this list.

if I get some time I may go back through the list and see I can point the articles back at this list. EdwardLane (talk) 09:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Seems like there might be a category like this already, but talk with Cgoodwin and Dana boomer, as they are the lead editors on this article. Montanabw^(talk) 22:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Classes unknown

Vinca major (commonly known as Large Periwinkle, Greater Periwinkle or Blue Periwinkle) Cgoodwin (talk) 03:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

References

Reference source on US plants

CG and all, I don't have the time to integrate these sources into the article, but they're good ones and worth checking to see if anything here needs to be added to the list:

• Which trees are toxic? On the major problem trees in the United States.
• Hoary Alyssium
• Big list of problem plants in the USA (bottom of article) and comment on Ragwort in the UK
• List of poisonous wild plants with scientific names (handy)

Montanabw^(talk) 03:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Rewrite

I've been working on this for a couple of weeks in my sandbox, and finally have it ready to go live. All of the plants that were included in the previous version are included in this one, with the exception of two or three that I couldn't find references for. All are sorted initially by scientific name, because I found this to be the easiest due to multiple common names for some plants, but the table can be forced to sort by common name (or by notes or by reference number, if you so wish). I'm thinking this might be a nice featured list for the project, so while more entries are welcome (I'm sure I've missed some, if not many), I beg that they please all be cited to reliable sources. Dana boomer (talk) 22:42, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Very nice and WOW! What a great effort! I'd support having the notes indicate degree of toxicity or toxic effects... i.e. the difference between black walnut consumption (fatal) versus, say, tansy consumption (not great, but not fatal). Montanabw^(talk) 06:23, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Taking that a bit further, I've always thought that the palatability axis is as important as the toxicity axis: comparing two plants with similar toxicity, the one that is grossly unpalatable is less of a danger than the one that is rather tasty. I fear this would be difficult to reference, though.

It might also be useful to call out plants that are toxic to horses but not to people (although I don't see any on the list that I don't suspect are wrong). There's always the tendency to think "If it doesn't hurt me, it won't hurt my horse", and the similar view with dogs leads to feeding chocolate, onions, and grapes, all of which are toxic to dogs.--Curtis Clark (talk) 14:38, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I wonder if the chart could add two narrow columns for a 1-3 letter code (Y/N or something) that notes those two factors?? The other thing I fret over is the neighbor with the big lawn who still doesn't quite see why he can't feed all his nice, rotting lawn clippings to his own horses. He doesn't do it, but it's not because he believes, it's more that he knows I'll rant and freak out (LOL)... Montanabw^(talk) 19:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

If the sources note the relative toxicity of the plant, I have no problem with adding that in - I was actually considering it before posting in the mainspace. I'm not convinced about the other two (palatability and toxicity to humans) however. Palatability is going to be very hard to source for most of the plants. A few are easy because they're unique (locoweeds are addictive, forex), but most of them are going to be dependent on horse health/feeding, pasture conditions, etc. There are even a few weeds that are especially palatable to horses that are deficient in certain minerals, but other horses in the same pasture without the mineral deficiency will avoid them. As for toxicity to humans, while it is an interesting fact, I don't really see how its necessary here. If people are looking at this list, they are already looking for plants that are poisonous to horses, and if anyone is stupid enough to go "oh, it's poisonous for my horse, I wonder if I can eat it" and then go try some, it's their own darn fault if they get sick. And, since humans aren't grazers, they don't eat most of the plants on this list anyways. If this was a "plants poisonous to mammals" I could see the comparison, or even if it was a "plants poisonous to livestock" I could see a comparison between horses, cattle, sheep, pigs, etc., but I'm just not seeing horses vs. humans in an article specifically about horses. Dana boomer (talk) 20:13, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

No, sorry I didn't make myself clear--I meant plants that are toxic to horses (that's what the article is about) but not toxic to humans: "I can eat it, why shouldn't I feed it to my horse." Quince, below, is a good example of that.--Curtis Clark (talk) 06:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I think where sourced, toxicity is important to add to the chart. It's true the others are more nuanced. Maybe if the list criteria allows it, add a narrative paragraph on the general concepts so that people understand that people aren't horses and that horses that may avoid unpalatable plants in a lush pasture might eat them in a stressed, overgrazed one? Would that work? Montanabw^(talk) 23:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

That's kind of what I was trying to get at with the last few sentences of the last paragraph of the lead. If you think it needs more, though, we can add more. Usually, lists include a several paragraph sourced lead (different from an article because not all information in the lead is repeated in the body and so it has to be sourced) which gives a general overview of the subject. That would probably be the best place for this information, and as I said, if you think more needs to be added we can definitely do that. I'll probably start working on toxicity information tomorrow, although if someone else gets there ahead of me I won't cry :) Dana boomer (talk) 00:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Great sortable tables, and now so much better! I had previously added quinces as these almost killed one of my horses (the only sicker horse I have seen died), twice until we realised what the problem was. However I can't find a ref. Horses and many other animals will resort to eating poisonous plants during drought and after bushfires, too.Cgoodwin (talk) 00:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Was it a case of quinces being poisonous, or of that particular horse being allergic to them? Do you have a ref for the bushfires thing, because that would be great to add in. If you don't' have one handy I can look but it will probably take me longer :) Dana boomer (talk) 12:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

The horse was under vet care in both incidents, but the cause was not definately confirmed. After the 2003 Canberra bushfires over 40 recorded horses were put down after eating Patersons Curse. Heavy snowfalls can also lead livestock to consume taller plants such as bracken.Cgoodwin (talk) 01:45, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

(undent)I wasn't doubting that the quince caused the illness - more wondering if it were limited to certain horses. Something along the lines of the fact that many humans are allergic to peanuts, but that doesn't mean that peanuts are poisonous to humans. I've found another reference for the wildfire information - I wasn't sure from the quote above if your reference made a direct link between wildfires and poisonous plants, or if it just discussed the timing as coincidental.

As a followup to the discussion about toxicity above, I think it's going to be hard to have this information for every plant (or even most). As far as I have found, there are very few (no?) sources that talk about relative toxicity between a wide selection of these plants - some discuss two, three, four, etc, but no more than that. Also, the toxicity often depends on how much of a plant they eat, although there are some that are fatal even in small amounts and so we should definitely note these. Until we have a source that compares relative toxicities, it's going to be hard to have a dedicated column on this information. Dana boomer (talk) 17:57, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I like the "fatal in small amounts" tag. That's the critical ones. I added a detail on some stuff that's taken over my pasture, based off your source material

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of plants poisonous to equines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110112023355/http://www.msuextension.org/ruralliving/Dream/PDF/Equine_poison.pdf to http://www.msuextension.org/ruralliving/Dream/PDF/Equine_poison.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://asgap.org.au/APOL7/sep97-4.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of plants poisonous to equines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101117170853/http://www.merckvetmanual.com/mvm/htm/bc/ttox05.htm to http://www.merckvetmanual.com/mvm/htm/bc/ttox05.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110221204206/http://www.seven.eques.com.au/health-pdf/Stringhalt.pdf to http://www.seven.eques.com.au/health-pdf/Stringhalt.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on List of plants poisonous to equines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120318233401/http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/horse-care-index/1370/36101.html to http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/horse-care-index/1370/36101.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101206031741/http://ohioline.osu.edu/b762/b762_24.html to http://ohioline.osu.edu/b762/b762_24.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/cps/rde/xchg/dpi/hs.xsl/4790_7246_ENA_HTML.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110104040547/http://cecalaveras.ucdavis.edu/toxic.htm to http://cecalaveras.ucdavis.edu/toxic.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.tamworthcares.com.au/index.cfm?page_parent_id=4&page_id=19
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715134242/http://www.qldhorsecouncil.com/QHC%20Documents/Biosec%20Horse%20Property/Plants%20Poisonous%20to%20Horses%20Aust%20field%20guide.pdf to http://www.qldhorsecouncil.com/QHC%20Documents/Biosec%20Horse%20Property/Plants%20Poisonous%20to%20Horses%20Aust%20field%20guide.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111126145406/http://www.library.illinois.edu/vex/toxic/lantana/lantana.htm to http://www.library.illinois.edu/vex/toxic/lantana/lantana.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101205220306/http://cal.vet.upenn.edu/projects/poison/plants/ppavoca.htm to http://cal.vet.upenn.edu/projects/poison/plants/ppavoca.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:01, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Serious problems

There are serious errors in this list, possibly due to uncritical use of refs. Many plants are listed which are either not toxic at all, or not toxic in amounts which a horse could possibly eat in real life. For example, the following plants are are very common in horse pasture and are all regularly eaten by my own horses without trouble: buttercups (Ranunculus), red clover (Trifolium pratense), male fern (Dryopteris filix-mas), ground ivy (Glechoma hederacea), dandelion (Taraxicum). Then there is perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne). This is one of the most common pasture grasses worldwide, and here in the UK you'd be pushed to find a single horse pasture which did not contain it – or indeed in many cases consist entirely of it! It is like listing potato as a food toxic to humans. (is it perhaps vandalism...?) Some of the listed plants may be toxic if a horse gorged on that and nothing else (eg Brassica, ), but that's a very different form of toxicity to other plants on the list, such as yew (Taraxicum) or cowbane (Cicuta) which can be deadly in small amounts. There are also plants listed which are potentially toxic but which horses normally avoid (eg Senecio, Rhododendron), and others which they can eat safely in small amounts or at certain times of year (eg Prunus, Ligustrum, Pteridium). Some are listed by genus, when only certain members of the genus are toxic and others are good forage (eg Centaurea). One of those listed isn't even a plant but a parasitic fungus (Claviceps). These are all nuances which are not at all apparent in this list, and so could cause a great deal of unnecessary concern in people using it as a source of practical information – which is after all what we're all here for.

My suggestion is that no plant should be included on this list without some explanation of the form and degree of the toxicity – in the way already done for example for Melilotus and Hypochaeris radicata. Richard New Forest (talk) 12:03, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree that it's a very poor list and hence article. If buttercups, red clover or dandelions were toxic to horse, there would be very few if any pastures in the UK that horses could graze! Listing by genus when only a few species are involved is quite wrong. There's also confusion between the plant itself being toxic and it being toxic when infected with a fungus or other non-plant organism. You might as well list wheat and other cereals as toxic to humans because they can be infected with ergot, which is. The list needs drastic trimming, and what is left re-organizing, with a distinction between the plant itself and when infected with something else. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:05, 21 June 2020 (UTC)